pwang7

I know for a fact, that the Chinese really like and respect Clinton as president. He created some of the strongest ties to China in history. He was also one of (if not) the first presidents to walk the Great Wall. Considering that China is in an economic boom at the moment, we will do better with more ties there.

wnker85

Agreed, If anything China will be the next "super power" if the US doesn't stay with the ties and also keeps its technology with in its borders. That’s what I am more afraid of than terrorism; it’s a war with China. And now that looks highly doubtful. But who knows if we get in a fight with North Korea all hell may break lose.



As an American I am sicken by this rhetoric. I do believe that if it wasn’t for the French helping us in the American revolution, and footing a huge amount of the men and money to run the last half of that war. Tony Blair would be running our lives not GW

Lebell

I would like to point out that it isn't Bush's religion that is a problem, it is the religion of Iran that is a problem.

That and the Palestinian/Arab/Israel problem.

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!

thefictionweliv

With this logic, Indians would still fight us, we would not have and alliance with Britain, Japan, Germany, and so on. There are living people at the present who suffered and lost loved ones in WW2.

cthulu23

Bush's religion is indeed a problem in many people's opinions. He may not sanction suicide bombers but his fundamentalist beliefs can and do come into play as far as his policies are concerned.

Lebell

I grant you that, but you can say the same thing about "X" trait about "Y" president.

Clinton's (and Kennedy's) sexual proclivities were a huge problem for some people while others didn't give a damn.

As to their effect on policy, many people also like them.

Thank God we live in a country where you can vote or not vote for such a person!

In Iran, you don't have that option

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!

aKula

No I don't think he should continue his leadership. Never liked the guy or his policies, both foreign and what I've heard of the domestic ones.
Bushes hardline attitude on the China really changed after Chinas support of the 'war on terrorism', reverting back to a more even handed approach to the cross straits issue. I found his hardline attitude on China dangerous.

timalkin

That's what happens when you sell secret American military technology to a national full of communists.

The world wants Kerry to be the next U.S. President? I can't think of a better reason to vote for Bush. There's a good reason why my ancestors came to America.

__________________
Trinity: "What do you need?"

Neo: "Guns. Lots of guns."

-The Matrix

high_jinx

i've noticed that in spite of the title and startpost, this thread has been dominated by americans saying they don't give a rats ass about what the rest of the world thinks. well, i'm going to continue the trend. i feel like w. is a real life darth vader and we have become the official villains of the earth on his watch. and i feel like thats a damn shame.

__________________
-my phobia drowned while i was gettin down.

prosequence

As an "outsider", I don't think Bush should gain the presidency, since he actually didn't win the first time around.
As for the other options, I think the US faces the same problem most countries have, picking the lesser of two evils.
It will be interesting to see how the election will go, lets hope it's based on votes this time around.

__________________
And now here I stand because of you, Mister Anderson, because of you I'm no longer an agent of the system, because of you I've changed...

DJ Happy

Islam is the problem? Forgive me if I haven't understood you correctly, but it seems to me that this is what you're saying. In which case, would you please explain?

Are there links for any of this?

jimbob

80% of non-americans want bush out and 50% of americans do. we're not so different after all! considering the mad proaganda that's fed to the population over there (80% thought that Iraqis hijacked the 9/11 planes and many think WMD was found (someone ought to tell Tony BLiar so he can stop apologising for not finding anything)) I think 50% is quite high.

Macheath

As a non-American, his foreign policy scares me. It scares me that Colin Powell might not be around for the next term. It scares me that the foreign policy prime movers of this White House have been called "fringe" by the old guard conservatives. Despite being a liberal, I can sorta respect your classic stuffy old Edmund Burke type conservative. These guys are far from it. I don't know WHAT their deal is.

They seem ideologically bent on sqeezing the world like a lump of clay and reshaping it into....what exactly? Is there even a plan, or just a whole lot of pie in the sky? That is the great "known unknown".

jimbob

Good point. Powell for US president and Clinton for EU president!

Locobot

How do you forsee any country having a "propensity to like us"? The true lesson of Bushwar for the world is that Americans are willing to elect and support a leader who will make bat-shit crazy military moves including unprovoked invasions. The other lesson for dictators and fundamentalist governments is that they had better develop nuclear weapons because that is apparently the only deterant effective against the right-wing that holds power in the U.S. (Iran, Pakistan, North Korea). How do you explain our government's handling of Saudia Arabia with kid gloves when it has been proven as an ongoing source of terrorists? The Bush docterine is untenable and arbitrary at best.

Lebell

Not exactly.

I specified Iran for a reason because the radical brand of Islam they practice.

I have no problem with Islam as a concept, but I do have a problem with any religion, or flavors thereof, that oppress non-believers.

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!

Lebell

"Bat-shit crazy military moves including unprovoked invasions" certainly is a colorful turn-of-phrase, but it is partisan and not universal opinion.

And many countries do like us, which you should at least admit, including many former Eastern block countries, many countries in our own hemisphere, and many western European countries.

As to Saudi Arabia, I explain our policy towards them in two ways.

Yes, we handle them with kid gloves when IMO, we should not, but we do it because the government there is amenable to change as well as to working with us against al quaeda (even though it is not as fast as I would like).

This was not true with Afghanistan or Iraq.

And it was Clinton and the presidents before him that "allowed" North Korea to get nuclear weapons. To lay that at Bush's feet is dishonest.

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!

charlesesl

It seems to me that this discussion is taking on the general view of: The rest of the world is jelous of us. And untill we beat sense into those savages, they will never be civilized like us.

Sad, really sad.

__________________
It did not really matter what we expected from life, but rather what life expected from us.
Dr. Viktor E. Frankl

Rekna

American here, and this needs to be said. Not all American's want to tell the world to fuck off. Some of us see the benifit of having neighbors you get along with. Some of us realize that despite what some people believe we cannot honestly say the USA is the best country in the world. It's time the world started to work together for the greater good.

I just don't understand it how a country as big as the USA composed of such a large diverse geographical, ethnical, and political spectrum can't see the value of the world working together. This country was founded on seperate governmental entities working together to further the greater good. What happend to that ideal?

Bodyhammer86

http://www.bowlingfortruth.com/fahre...raqalqaeda.htm
http://www.bowlingfortruth.com/fahre...prewariraq.htm

__________________
Pantera, Shadows Fall, Fear Factory, Opeth, Porcupine Tree, Dimmu Borgir, Watch Them Die, Motorhead, Beyond the Embrace, Himsa, Black Label Society, Machine Head, In Flames, Soilwork, Dark Tranquility, Children of Bodom, Norther, Nightrage, At the Gates, God Forbid, Killswitch Engage, Lamb of God, All That Remains, Anthrax, Mudvayne, Arch Enemy, and Old Man's Child \m/

Boo

A most interesting thread I must say. More quality content than many.

It appears that America should carry a big stick and never use it according to a few people. Because if we have a big stick and use it without the worlds permission we are HATED for it. Hated for seeking out those who have wronged us. Hated for utilizing our big stick for its intended purpose. Maybe we didn't smooch up to a few less that supportive countries and give them a chance at the contracts? Maybe we no longer view them as best friends and now consider them to be a liability? I say we hit the non-supporters in their checkbook and now they are crying foul.

Funny how Colin Powell can be the next "Great American Hope" after being a part in all that makes us HATED around the world. I guess he just sits in his office and collects a check every month while planning his presidency with Hillary. Its all GWB's fault.

IMO - NATO is now cowering in fear of having to perform a police action (like in Africa maybe) because the US may not support it by providing 100% of the money, aid and troops. I guess the many nations that now HATE us don't want to put their sons, daughters, and money where their mouth is.

__________________
Back button again, I must be getting old.

Dyze

I am from Germany and I live in the US right now. We would be happy if you would close down all your bases, spy posts and other crap in Europe. We don't want them and the economy would perfectly go on without them.
Talking about illegal/strange investments... I would like to see those blacked-out names of American companies that were on that list which was intended to blame France. And I would like to see the reasons behind the trillions of Saudi-Arabian Dollars invested in the US.
But, I have accepted that politicians lie to you and to us more than you can imagine.

DJ Happy

These sites seem to take circumstantial evidence and disputed theories and present them as hard facts. They do exactly what they complain Michael Moore does himself (and I agree with them about what they say about Moore - I'm not a particularly big fan of his myself).

Locobot

Okay, remove the "bat-shit crazy" phrase, of course that's opinion, and look at what you're left with: truth.
I'll admit that many countries did like us. The U.S. was looked to as a source of optimism, democratic ideals, and, in general, a beacon of light in the world. In the last two years however I've seen that light extinguished by an overwhelming wave of anti-americanism. The turning point is obvious too, there was a great deal of sympathy for the U.S. following 9/11 that was reversed when the Bush admin. began selling the world the "product" of an Iraq invasion (see Andrew Card for quotes).
Our differences here are minor, I won't quibble.
You're right that blame doesn't entirely fall on Bush for N. Korea's nuclear proliferation, but it did happen on his watch. And, in any case, you miss my point about nuclear weapons. My point is that the Bush doctorine apparently doesn't apply to nations that have nuclear capability, the lesson being that if your nation is a possible target of U.S. aggression you had better develop them post haste.

I think your reasoning is sound that when the U.S. flexes its military muscles it gains respect from some would-be enemies who may respect nothing else. But why did this occur only with the Iraq invasion and not Afgahnistan? What will happen to that respect after another 1, 3, 5, 10 years of Iraq war? Another 1000, 5000, 10,000 U.S. casualties? Will we have to kill 20,000 more Iraqis? 50,000 more? News trickles out of Iraq slowly, unbiased news reports are almost entirely missing, but it does not appear to be a war we are winning. I'm not even sure who we are actually fighting. Saddam is in jail and yet we're fighting in regions that historically hated Saddam as much as they apparently hate us. What happens to that respect for our military might if resistance to U.S. forces continues indefinitely?

kd4

so true, everytime I hear something bad about the French and how they didn't help us, seriously...wow. If WW1 is your only example, we're, "even," WW2, yea ok we don't help the french and we'll be fine...heard of zimmerman?

daswig

It's amazing what spreading our national legs will do to increase your popularity with the leadership of our enemies.

The greatest thing about Clinton was that he could be bought. Cheaply. And he often was.

cthulu23

Did you ever notice how the Republican saber rattling over China disappeared along with Clinton? Aren't they still a "most favored nation?" Don't we have a republican president and sentate?

daswig

I'm not a Republican. I DO recall strained relations with China after Bush took office...after they forced that US military surveillance plane to land and refused to release the plane and crew. That took second fiddle after 9/11

Al Queda is a minor threat. In 20-30 years, the US will be at war with Communist China. Mark my words...

charlesesl

lol, and i guess it is China's fault that an american SPY-plan landed in their military base.

__________________
It did not really matter what we expected from life, but rather what life expected from us.
Dr. Viktor E. Frankl

cthulu23

Given the nature of the world economy and how succesfully China is playing along in it I think that this prediction is more then a little farfetched.

By the way, isn't it time that we switched to the term "totalitarianist Chinese?" It's a lot more accurate then calling a country with massive capital infuxes, private factories and "investment opportunities" communist.

Lebell

I recall the incident.

The plane was FORCED to land at the air-base.

It had been flying in international air-space.

So yes, it is China's fault.

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!

Mojo_PeiPei

The point of China's involvement in the world economy is too make sure this war never happens Cthulu. The time frame and possibility of war with that is not all that farfetched. I'm getting a little anxious, it's been a long time since we've had a world war, we are due.

__________________
To win a war you must serve no master but your ambition.

daswig

Considering that they had to crash a fighter plane into the surveillance plane to get it to land, yeah, it was their fault.

Locobot

Considering the close ties that American companies have made to China over the past 5-10 years, including factories from Detroit's "big 3" automakers this seems highly unlikely.

daswig

Then why is the chinese military being told that their ultimate enemy is in fact the US, and that they need to be prepared? Why is the PLAN building a blue-water navy?

cthulu23

I don't get what you're saying...China is in the world economy to enrich itself (as is every other nation), but that has the pleasant side effect of making conflict less logical...you don't attack your best trading partner, right? Given the increased trade and cultural engagement with China, who is going to start the war? Taiwan is always an issue, but we've avoided war over that issue through much more tense times then today.

daswig

Why? Who was France's largest trading partner in 1938?

cthulu23

Even if this is true, it has no relevance. Germany and France had a history of conflict, Germany blamed France for their economic collapse and post-WWI "humiliation" and they are located near each other. The US and China are completely different nations in a completely different world.

daswig

Yessir, the US and China never got into it, not when the PLA invaded Korea, nor when they supplied massive logistical support to the Vietnamese. I have friends that are still alive that killed Chinese Communists in a real-live shooting war. No history of conflict there...

The chinese were so concerned about obtaining missile technology to allow them to construct inter-continental ballistic missiles because....we were too far from them to use intra-continental ballistic missiles for their nukes?

Ace_O_Spades

As an outsider, I will also refocus the original intent of this thread:

When I watch Bush speak, I see an unintelligent warmonger who can't coordinate an organized thought. I don't like the fact that many people here are supporting a president who is constructing economic as well as cultural walls around your great country... Before you know it, you'll be all alone... If that's what you want, so be it... But don't think that globalization will stop just because America isn't involved.

When I see Kerry speak, I see someone who wants to rebuild bridges burned by the Bush administration, improve america's foreign policy, rebuild your floundering economy, hell... fucking make healthcare more available to everyone! That's something most Canadians take for granted. I see an educated man who is extremely well spoken.

I take pride in the fact that when I travel abroad, I can wear a Canadian flag with pride... Hell, many American travellers sew Canadian flags on their bags simply to be better received in the country where they travel to. The world exists outside of your borders, I hope that Kerry gets elected so that you can realize it.

__________________
Feh.